Super Rugby Expansion
-
<p>Suggestions have been made recently for Super Rugby to expand into the U.K/Pacific Islands.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I have come up with a tongue and cheek Super Rugby model for the future which you may like or highly dislike. Personally I don't want to see it expand but I believe this is the only way for it to work if it does.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Basically you have two conferences (North and South below). Each team within their respective conference plays one another in a throwback to the original Super 12.</p>
<p>The Top 4 from each each conference will then crossover and play Super Rugby Quarters finals, Semi Finals and then the Final (played at the venue of the strongest overall team).</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I've added four U.K teams, one American team and one pacific island team which adds to 24 overall teams.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>A positive to having two conferences would be the travel factor, meaning teams will not have to travel as far as they would in the current system.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>North Conference:</p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">1. Wales</span></p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">2. Ireland</span></p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">3. England</span></p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">4. Scotland</span></p>
<p>5. Sharks</p>
<p>6. Stormers</p>
<p>7. Bulls</p>
<p>8. Lions</p>
<p>9. Cheetahs</p>
<p>10. Kings</p>
<p>11. Jaguars</p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">12. America 2</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>South Conference:</p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">1. Pacific Island</span></p>
<p>2. Blues</p>
<p>3. Chiefs</p>
<p>4. Hurricanes</p>
<p>5. Crusaders</p>
<p>6. Highlanders</p>
<p>7. Brumbies</p>
<p>8. Waratahs</p>
<p>9. Reds</p>
<p>10. Western Force</p>
<p>11. Rebels</p>
<p>12. Sunwolves</p> -
<p>I <em>really</em> hope it's not going to happen, but if it does, then I'd swap the Jaguares and Sunwolves for the simple reason that the Jaguares are from the SH and Sunwolves from the NH. Jaguares are fine as far as time zones are concerned (I love Sunday morning games); Sunwolves and American team (I assume that's North America?) should be in same conference, esp if the American team is based in the West of the continent. In both cases, travel for the Sunwolves and Jaguares (and American team) remains a nightmare.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Not sure how they'd organise a PI team. Don't think it should be based in NZ or Oz, because then the Islands don't get to profit from it (I mean supporters, local economy, development of local rugby). The financial obstacles of a PI team cannot be ignored either.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Instead of adding teams to Super Rugby and changing the format again, I'd be much more in favour of synchronising the rugby seasons in the NH and SH, and then organise a play-off between the top 2-4 teams of each competition (Super Rugby, Eur Champions Cup) for a world club title at the end of the season. To be included, the American pro competition should first mature more. </p> -
<p>I don't even want to discuss expanding the Super comp any further, it's already so fucking diluted.</p>
-
The upshot of this will be that it will become so ungainly, with massive disparity between the best and worst teams that an elite competition will eventuate from the best teams, offering a much improved spectacle for the viewing audience and the whole process will start again...
-
<p>need a global season first:</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Play starts Feb-end of June, break July/Aug</p>
<p>Starts up Sep-end of Nov, break Dec/Jan.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Although each break could probably be 6 weeks giving players 12+ weeks off a year...making a max of 40 games per year</p> -
<p>Bring back Super 12. No conference rubbish. Every team plays each other. The comp doesn't drag out to long. There's sufficient prep time for test footy.</p>
-
<p>5 NZ sides</p>
<p>Natal, Northern Transvaal, Transvaal and Western Province</p>
<p>3 Aussie sides</p> -
<p>I have no idea why SANZAAR would want to negate the entertainment factor of Super Rugby: a top of the table Pro 12 clash between Irish sides Connacht and Leinster resulted in a 7-6 scoreline over 80 minutes of rugby. Thanks but no thanks for NH representation.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I do think Super Rugby should expand to 20 teams - an extra Argentinian side and probably another side from Asia or North America, to balance the format.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Unfortunately, corruption means the Pacific Islands are probably a no-runner.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Stargazer" data-cid="567989" data-time="1459209283">
<div>
<p>I <em>really</em> hope it's not going to happen, but if it does, then I'd swap the Jaguares and Sunwolves for the simple reason that the Jaguares are from the SH and Sunwolves from the NH. <strong>Jaguares are fine as far as time zones are concerned (I love Sunday morning games);</strong> Sunwolves and American team (I assume that's North America?) should be in same conference, esp if the American team is based in the West of the continent. In both cases, travel for the Sunwolves and Jaguares (and American team) remains a nightmare.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Not sure how they'd organise a PI team. Don't think it should be based in NZ or Oz, because then the Islands don't get to profit from it (I mean supporters, local economy, development of local rugby). The financial obstacles of a PI team cannot be ignored either.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Instead of adding teams to Super Rugby and changing the format again, I'd be much more in favour of synchronising the rugby seasons in the NH and SH, and then organise a play-off between the top 2-4 teams of each competition (Super Rugby, Eur Champions Cup) for a world club title at the end of the season. To be included, the American pro competition should first mature more. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Uh, 7:30PM in NZ -> 3:30AM in Argentina. Just because you love it, doesn't mean the Argies will. Meanwhile Japan's only 3 hours behind NZ, so as far as time zones go, Japan makes far more sense to be grouped with us, while Argentina makes far more sense to be grouped with the Saffas.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anyway, the only expansion I'd like to see is Argentina getting a second team.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Unco" data-cid="568097" data-time="1459227350">
<div>
<p><strong>Uh, 7:30PM in NZ -> 3:30AM in Argentina.</strong> Just because you love it, doesn't mean the Argies will. Meanwhile Japan's only 3 hours behind NZ, so as far as time zones go, Japan makes far more sense to be grouped with us, while Argentina makes far more sense to be grouped with the Saffas.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anyway, the only expansion I'd like to see is Argentina getting a second team.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>You haven't been watching the Jaguares home games, have you? They started at 10.40am NZT (-> 6.40pm in Argentina; they are 16 hours behind NZ). I was talking about the Jaguares home games, not NZ games.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>My comment that I love Sunday morning games was written between brackets, in case you didn't notice (it was a personal comment, just as I wrote my personal opinion on this topic; it wasn't about what the Argies might think of it). </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anyway, as I said before, I hope this kind of expansion doesn't happen.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Stargazer" data-cid="568111" data-time="1459229681">
<div>
<p>You haven't been watching the Jaguares home games, have you? They started at 10.40am NZT.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>My comment that I love Sunday morning games was written between brackets, in case you didn't notice (it was a personal comment, just as I wrote my personal opinion on this topic; it wasn't about what the Argies might think of it). </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>What are you talking about? My point was that the Jaguares are a bad fit for the NZ/Aus conference due to the exact point you brought up, time zones. Putting them in the SA conference makes far, far more sense due to that reason alone. Take a look at a schedule with all the different times to see for yourself:</p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.superxv.com/fixtures/'>http://www.superxv.com/fixtures/</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crash" data-cid="568114" data-time="1459230556">
<div>
<p>If the Sunwolves last beyond this saeaon, then I'll eat my hat....they/re already suffering dwindling audiences in Singapore </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Move all their home games to Japan and I think they'll be fine. They've had enough close games to give them a little credibility, which is more than anyone can say about the Kings.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crash" data-cid="568114" data-time="1459230556">
<div>
<p>If the Sunwolves last beyond this saeaon, then I'll eat my hat....they/re already suffering dwindling audiences in Singapore </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>They do get very good attendances in Japan. </p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Unco" data-cid="568117" data-time="1459230878">
<div>
<p>What are you talking about? <strong>My point was that the Jaguares are a bad fit for the NZ/Aus conference</strong> due to the exact point you brought up, time zones. Putting them in the SA conference makes far, far more sense due to that reason alone. Take a look at a schedule with all the different times to see for yourself:</p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.superxv.com/fixtures/'>http://www.superxv.com/fixtures/</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Move all their home games to Japan and I think they'll be fine. They've had enough close games to give them a little credibility, which is more than anyone can say about the Kings.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>True only if NZ home games against the Jaguares should always be played in the evening. If you have a kick-off time of 2.35pm (like in NPC) on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon, it's no worse for Argentinian viewers than their (current) away games in SA. It all depends on how flexible they (Sanzaar, broadcasters etc) can and want to be. I find the travel distance a far more convincing argument for placing the Argies in a SA Group (and Sunwolves in Australasian) than time zones.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Stargazer" data-cid="568130" data-time="1459234062">
<div>
<p>True only if NZ home games against the Jaguares should always be played in the evening. If you have a kick-off time of 2.35pm (like in NPC) on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon, it's no worse for Argentinian viewers than their (current) away games in SA. It all depends on how flexible they (Sanzaar, broadcasters etc) can and want to be. I find the travel distance a far more convincing argument for placing the Argies in a SA Group (and Sunwolves in Australasian) than time zones.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>SANZAAR isn't going to do that and we all know. They want as many games as possible during EU/SA friendly times.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And yeah, I agree on the travel distance, I just figured that was a given. SA to Japan and vice versa is a pretty insanely long flight.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="568066" data-time="1459220439"><p>
5 NZ sides<br>
Natal, Northern Transvaal, Transvaal and Western Province<br>
3 Aussie sides</p></blockquote>
<br>
SA teams were whoever was top 4 in the previous year's Currie Cup. <br><br>
So Free State made the cut in 97 in place of WP.<br><br>
Appears the permanent franchises from SA were entered in 98. -
<p>yeah those were the teams in 1996....</p>
-
<p>Having been in the UK for a bit now, I don't think anyone up here besides hard core rugby fans and ex-pats give a rats about Super Rugby. This TV times for the Northern Hemisphere is a myth.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>However, night rugby certainly does work better for domestic broadcasters and advertisers.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Unco" data-cid="568117" data-time="1459230878">
<div>
<p>Move all their home games to Japan and I think they'll be fine. They've had enough close games to give them a little credibility, which is more than anyone can say about the Kings.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I'll admit to being genuinely surprised at how competitive the Sunwolves have been thus far.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="ACT Crusader" data-cid="568044" data-time="1459217267">
<div>
<p>Bring back Super 12. No conference rubbish. Every team plays each other. The comp doesn't drag out to long. There's sufficient prep time for test footy.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Yep - it's reached the stage where I'm starting to lose interest in it being anything like a fair competition. When you can't be sure that the best team isn't going to be handicapped out of winning it becomes a bit hard to take seriously.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Allstar" data-cid="568290" data-time="1459286913"><p>Having been in the UK for a bit now, I don't think anyone up here besides hard core rugby fans and ex-pats give a rats about Super Rugby. This TV times for the Northern Hemisphere is a myth.<br><br>
However, night rugby certainly does work better for domestic broadcasters and advertisers.</p></blockquote>
I'd dispute that. In the 8 years I've been here it's gone from pretty much nothing to having every game broadcast and having a panel of fishheads presenting every game. So I'd say there's a reason for that. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Bones" data-cid="568765" data-time="1459429915">
<div>
<p>I'd dispute that. In the 8 years I've been here it's gone from pretty much nothing to having every game broadcast and having a panel of fishheads presenting every game. So I'd say there's a reason for that.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Its always been fully covered. And in the early days they were getting Fitzy & Lynah doing the studio bit. Now half the time its on Sky Sports 3, 4 or 5 FFS, its been shunted out to the shithole channels that only the truely cashed up get. And it always used to get replayed a bit, you could often catch the morning games again at 2 or 3pm.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Part of the fall off will be there are about 300,000 less Aussies & Kiwis in the UK these days. Once the south took off in the mid 00's & the dollar rose a LOT of folks headed home</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Bones" data-cid="568772" data-time="1459435480">
<div>
<p>They have Fitzy and Lynagh doing it now. I don't remember that from the first year or 2. I do remember having to hunt around when a game wasn't being broadcast. Maybe just me.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Shows how often I watch it now! I get all excited then go on & its fricking Sky 3. What am I? Made of Sky pounds?</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="568773" data-time="1459436051"><p>Shows how often I watch it now! I get all excited then go on & its fricking Sky 3. What am I? Made of Sky pounds?</p></blockquote>
They have that ex bokke fullback, Ali Williams and Nick Evans these days too. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="568771" data-time="1459434560">
<div>
<p>Its <strong>always </strong>been fully covered. And in the early days they were getting Fitzy & Lynah doing the studio bit. Now half the time its on Sky Sports 3, 4 or 5 FFS, its been shunted out to the shithole channels that only the truely cashed up get. And it always used to get replayed a bit, you could often catch the morning games again at 2 or 3pm.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Part of the fall off will be there are about 300,000 less Aussies & Kiwis in the UK these days. Once the south took off in the mid 00's & the dollar rose a LOT of folks headed home</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>When I was living there (99-04) I am sure we only got 2 or 3 games a weekend.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="568800" data-time="1459456411">
<div>
<p>When I was living there (99-04) I am sure we only got 2 or 3 games a weekend.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>yes that was right, mainly saturday morning. now it is virtually every game</p> -
<p>Good to hear you getting plenty of the super rugby up north Grubs, know the prodigal loves being able to watch it in Italy. And I happy as now we getting Setanta on Foxtel so I can get more of your rugby from up that way. Don't know why 'her that thinks she rules' isn't as pleased as me about more rugby on tv. The only regular stuff we have had has been Top 14 from france, so a bit more will go down pretty well!!</p>
-
Pacific Islands Super Rugby team moves step closer...but based in Hawaii
A combined Pacific Islands team could be launched as a Super Rugby franchise based in Hawaii in 2020.
-
@African Monkey said:
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crash" data-cid="568114" data-time="1459230556">
<div>
<p>If the Sunwolves last beyond this saeaon, then I'll eat my hat....Seeing as this thread got bumped - I noticed the date on that post. I think @Kirwan ate a hat some years ago (might have been due to comments about FABSH?), so he can probably recommend condiments. Chilli sauce for a sombrero, mustard for a bowler, that sort of thing.
As for the article -Is the group that says that they will fund it the same one that wanted to buy the Warriors?
-
Canes4life said:
<p>Suggestions have been made recently for Super Rugby to expand into the U.K/Pacific Islands.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I have come up with a tongue and cheek Super Rugby model for the future which you may like or highly dislike. Personally I don't want to see it expand but I believe this is the only way for it to work if it does.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Basically you have two conferences (North and South below). Each team within their respective conference plays one another in a throwback to the original Super 12.</p>
<p>The Top 4 from each each conference will then crossover and play Super Rugby Quarters finals, Semi Finals and then the Final (played at the venue of the strongest overall team).</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I've added four U.K teams, one American team and one pacific island team which adds to 24 overall teams.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>A positive to having two conferences would be the travel factor, meaning teams will not have to travel as far as they would in the current system.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>North Conference:</p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">1. Wales</span></p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">2. Ireland</span></p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">3. England</span></p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">4. Scotland</span></p>
<p>5. Sharks</p>
<p>6. Stormers</p>
<p>7. Bulls</p>
<p>8. Lions</p>
<p>9. Cheetahs</p>
<p>10. Kings</p>
<p>11. Jaguars</p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">12. America 2</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>South Conference:</p>
<p><span style="color:#ff0000;">1. Pacific Island</span></p>
<p>2. Blues</p>
<p>3. Chiefs</p>
<p>4. Hurricanes</p>
<p>5. Crusaders</p>
<p>6. Highlanders</p>
<p>7. Brumbies</p>
<p>8. Waratahs</p>
<p>9. Reds</p>
<p>10. Western Force</p>
<p>11. Rebels</p>
<p>12. Sunwolves</p>The French and Italians might not like being left out. Maybe instead of having the four home nations work out some combined European teams which is probably never likely to happen due to club commitments etc. Also would this comp be played at same time of year or during the corresponding autumn - winter seasons for each hemisphere?
